Go to the T1 schools, don't hedge your bets on finishing in the top 5% of a T4 class.

The military cares much less about where you went to school than what you did while you were there. A middle of the road Harvard grad is at a disadvantage to a tier 4 grad who is top of his class, on law review, and a moot court champ. Achievements matter far more than prestige.

The chances of you becoming a law professor from a t-4 are pretty much slim to none.

I clearly said I wanted to teach undergrads.

You should have no trouble getting a job at a community college or private school (i.e. University of Phoenix, DeVry, National University). You could be adjunct faculty at schools like UNLV, CSU, or other smaller state schools. Getting a gig as as a tenured professor that teaches upper division courses usually requires a doctorate (the JD is a professional degree that would not help you in that respect). You could teach lower division poli-sci courses, critical thinking classes, our business law courses with a JD. To teach upper division courses, you also need to publish a fair share of papers. That's a big deal in academia. You will also need peer-reviewed work.

Do you have any idea what the teaching market is like at the college level? Adjuncts get very low pay and no benefits. You will not become a tenured prof without a Ph.D. (with very, very few exceptions) and even then the odds of becoming a tenured prof (even at a podunk state U) are very, very low because universities have figured out it's far more profitable to have grad student instructors and adjuncts teach undergrads rather than create new tenure track positions.

In fact two people I know LEFT the adjunct teaching scene at large state universities to become lawyers. One is a tax attorney now and is doing well - the other is still in law school.

In all honesty, if you really want to teach with a JD, a far more viable plan would be to go to a dirt cheap law school and then become a public high school teacher.

Of course, there is always the remote possibility that if your successful in your career as an attorney - YEARS later (like say 25 years after graduation) you might be able to teach as an adjunct law prof. Usually lower tiered law schools use adjuncts to teach certain specialized courses their tenured profs can't or don't want to teach.

The chances of you becoming a law professor from a t-4 are pretty much slim to none.

I clearly said I wanted to teach undergrads.

You should have no trouble getting a job at a community college or private school (i.e. University of Phoenix, DeVry, National University). You could be adjunct faculty at schools like UNLV, CSU, or other smaller state schools. Getting a gig as as a tenured professor that teaches upper division courses usually requires a doctorate (the JD is a professional degree that would not help you in that respect). You could teach lower division poli-sci courses, critical thinking classes, our business law courses with a JD. To teach upper division courses, you also need to publish a fair share of papers. That's a big deal in academia. You will also need peer-reviewed work.

I believe the OP stated that becoming a professor was his long-term goal. He indicated that his plan was to retire from the military before teaching. So, the low pay might not be a problem with a military pension.

Most adjunct faculty positions pay poorly. Though, many of the people who take those positions work for multiple universities and community colleges and supplement their low pay with volume. Several of my professors taught at UNLV, DeVry, Regis, community college, and the University of Phoenix concurrently. A few were retired military, as well. It's a very practical plan.

I don't think where you go to school is of importance to many (though not all) government jobs. The SEC really does not care about prestige so much as experience. I think the IRS and the DOJ are similar. I don't know about the JAG Corps, but I would expect that they are even less impressed by prestige. Don't quote me on that because I have little firsthand knowledge. I new some JAG lawyers when I was in the Marine Corps. I don't think any of them went to top law schools, but that may not be representative of JAG across all four services. It was always my understanding that JAG lawyers primarily came from state schools because the military sponsored PLC (Platoon Leaders' Course) programs at state schools. They paid for law school for candidates. Upon graduation, I believe that you entered the JAG Corps as a Captain.

If the JAG Corps cared about prestige, why would it not send its PLC candidates to the best schools? Wouldn't it be ideologically inconsistent to give preference to prestige when the military sponsors programs at state schools? I realize that the military pays for state school education to control cost. Even still, it would seem somewhat inconsistent.

You are dead wrong about the SEC and the DOJ. Those entities are very prestige and /or law school grades focused. The DOJ especially so.

There are exceptions though, for example, a law student who worked in finance or the securities industry for several years before law school might have an outside shot at the SEC even if not at the top of the class or at a top law law school.

Many government jobs are competitive and a lot more competitive than people realize. Some agencies flat out will not hire anyone without at least five years of post-grad attorney experience and others hire strictly from certain schools or cherry pick top students from local schools.

JAGs come from a wide variety of schools, from what I've seen. That's not to say JAG isn't competitive, it is. It just seems they take more into account that simply the school you went to or the grades you got when deciding who to hire. It makes sense because not everyone is cut out for the military.

You are dead wrong about the SEC and the DOJ. Those entities are very prestige and /or law school grades focused. The DOJ especially so.

There are exceptions though, for example, a law student who worked in finance or the securities industry for several years before law school might have an outside shot at the SEC even if not at the top of the class or at a top law law school.

Many government jobs are competitive and a lot more competitive than people realize. Some agencies flat out will not hire anyone without at least five years of post-grad attorney experience and others hire strictly from certain schools or cherry pick top students from local schools.

JAGs come from a wide variety of schools, from what I've seen. That's not to say JAG isn't competitive, it is. It just seems they take more into account that simply the school you went to or the grades you got when deciding who to hire. It makes sense because not everyone is cut out for the military.

I simply must disagree. I have very close friends who are UNLV grads who work for both the SEC and DOJ. I've visited the headquarters of both organizations and spoke with their recruiters. The SEC hiring manager flat told me, "I don't care what school you come from, I only care about you grades and relevant experience." I know alot of people at the SEC because I work with them on a regular basis. My speciality is registration statements for companies going public. You couldn't be more wrong. I would take the word of several SEC recruiters, reviewers, and friends over yours.

You are correct that they care about grades. Accomplishments are important, as well. UNLV is hardly a top school, yet I know several SEC Corp Fin reviewers from there. How would you explain that? Granted, all of them graduated in the top ten % of their respective classes.

I don't know as much about the DOJ, but I know a few prosecutors. None of them went to top law schools. The DOJ is less likely to hire someone fresh out of law school, though. Oh, for that matter, how do you explain the fact that many of the US and Assistant US Attorneys hired in the Bush administration came out of Regent? Not a top school by a long shot!